When Good Companies Go Alarmist

Several corporations recently cancelled their membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce over differing views on cap-and-trade legislation. The Chamber of Commerce wants to pursue a rational debate over the direction the nation should take on climate change legislation. Corporations like Nike, Apple and Exelon subsequently left the Chamber of Commerce for a number of reasons. “Saving the planet” is probably not one of them.

As it happens, Al Gore is a member of the board of Apple, and Apple’s Chief Operating Officer, Tim Cook, sits on the board of Nike. So it should be fairly obvious why Nike and Apple are supporting cap-and-trade. Nike’s and Apple’s manufacturing bases also lie mostly outside the United States and would be unaffected by a cap-and-trade program. Thus, both Nike and Apple can project a “green” image for their young, environmentally conscious consumers and gain a market advantage by supporting a program that could hinder their U.S.-based competitors.

Other companies, like Exelon, are simply waiting to feed from the government-imposed cap-and-trade money trough. Exelon is the biggest nuclear power operator in the country, and Exelon’s CEO John Rowe is endorsing cap-and-trade in order to cash in on the numerous subsidies and market manipulations currently written into the Senate climate bill, which could boost Exelon’s profits by $1.1 billion (39 percent).

Apparently, it’s easy being “green,” when “green” means government-guaranteed profiteering and rent-seeking.


Todd Wynn is the climate change and energy policy analyst at Cascade Policy Institute, Oregon’s free market public policy research organization.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 06:00 | Posted in Measure 37 | 38 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Anonymous

    I’m not saying you’re wrong Todd, but I will say you’d have a hard time being any more cynical.

    • Majorie

      He happens to be right.

      • Anonymous

        Okay. Then I guess it’s just good business, and we can’t really fault them for that.

  • Jerry

    I simply choose not to do business with loser companies that quit the Chamber due to phone, ginned up, fake global warming crap.

  • DCTJ

    I agree with Todd. Thankfully, the Chamber is standing up for the interests of a majority of the American businesses that will be hurt by cap and trade legislation. Cap and trade will wreck the US economy. Write your Senators and encourage them to vote against this disastrous legislation at https://tiny.cc/eUj9j.

  • Anonymous

    It is not cynical to view this as Todd has in the context of the tremendous level of lying by AGW proponents at every level. From phony polar bears endangerment to attributing Hurricane Katrina to human CO2 emissions/Global Warming the depth of fraud is clear.

    Locally the v/dean and Appell have parroted all of the bigger lies in their attempt to mislead people.

    One of their regular whoppers is the claim no AGW skeptics are qualified experts or publish in peer review publications.

    Well CO2 emissions have not effected polar bears at all, Katrina was not caused by AGW, Oregon’s dead zones are not caused by “global warming winds” and

    450 Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming
    https://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html

  • Rupert in Springfield

    I think the cat is out of the bag on a lot of this stuff.. Why should world leaders be looked at with any seriousness on the topic when they fly to summits on private jets to discuss it? Al Gore? Why should his now semi annual testimony on Capitol Hill be listened to? He gets their via private jet and then flies back to his mansion that uses so much power he has his own substation. Corporate interests? I have not heard of a one where it isn’t patently obvious that their interest is the leverage discussed in Mr. Wynn’s article. In short, it is real hard to get people to go along with a movement when virtually all of its proponents seem to have a strong vested interest in the outcome. AGW is about pull and profits and little else in a lot of peoples eyes. Nikes and others endorsement of cap and tax in an indictment cap and tax with it’s clear gains for them at the expense of companies that operate in the US.

    The whole thing has gotten so absurd. You simply can’t have a president who flies on a date to NYC with his wife asking to be looked at seriously when he expresses concern over AGW.

    I never thought cap and tax would become law this year, I still don’t. Frankly I think Cap and Tax legislation is so far off we are actually more likely to see a decision from BO on Afghanistan troop levels before any legislation is passed.

  • Eddie

    No, these companies are not leaving the Chamber of Commerce because of its position, they’re leaving it because the Executive Director started making policy decisions without the consent of his Board.

    What’s the point of being active in such an organization (and in Nike’s case, sitting on the Board) if the Executive Director is simply going to act independently of your direction?

    Of course the rest of the discussion is still an interesting back-and-forth, but as for the premise of the post… this is bad governance at the Chamber no matter what your views on cap-n-trade.

  • John

    I’ve always felt that the “green movement” is about making money rather then taking better care of the environment as far as the large corporations are concerned. In this country where most of the large corporations/Wall Street/ banks and so on are greedy, irresponsible, reckless and they get away with their criminal actions, it’s hardly surprising that they are profiting from this. The federal government has paved the way for even more corruption and criminal activity from the corporations.

    I’ve never taken Al Gore seriously, I see him as a massive hypocrite/egomaniac spreading unnecessary fear amongst a small section of the population that can’t think for themselves. The Global Warming/Climate Change/Green Movement is simply a massive ad campaign created to generate profits even if the profits are gained by unethical and irresponsible actions.

  • Itsnotatumor

    So Nike isn’t a local American business? There are a few thousand employees and one billionaire in Beaverton who might disagree with you on that one.

    Todd Wynn is a climate change alarmist himself. He questions anyone on any side believing climate change is a real phenomenon without financial gain. He paints himself into a weak corner shared with conspiracy loonies and wing nuts. His argument isn’t logic backed by fact its rhetoric loosely connected like an Oliver Stone plot.

    Apple and Nike also have one other thing in common. They are ran by PR savy marketers. You ever think that they got a bunch of free media standing by what they believed. They pulled out of another trade group that probably charges a boat load to belong to and does nothing for them. There was no down side (as opposed to Wynn’s arguments that are goofy).

    I disagree with the Al Gore alarmism and psuedo-science pushed by many global warming advocates. Regardless though this is a real issue. Conservatives being just knee jerk against it puts you on the outs of the mainstream. Additionally, being FOR pollution rarely is seen as selfless as “Republican owned business interest” will be the byline used to describe why we question climate change (as liberals more effectively use Todd’s arguments above against us).

    Human pollution has an effect on our environment. Where there is pollution there is usually a pronounced amount of CO2 from burning fossil fuels. You can “de-bunk” all you want. Pollution is not something the public or business will ever find itself supporting.

    You are on the losing side of this argument given the “nu-uh” approach to argument.

    Real arguments.

    Cap and trade will not work and won’t achieve CO2 reductions as promised. It will transfer wealth from the US to the third world while still enabling the world to rely on petroleum and coal as its primary energy supply.

    The only solution to pollution and CO2 reduction is newer and better technologies. This requires tax rates and regulations that inspire investment and innovation. American entrepreneurship is the only real solution we can rely on.

    Al Gore is disingenuous about his beliefs and speaks to the American public like its a child. He also is one of the world’s most prolific exaggerators and liars. His claims to climate change are over stated and obscure the real issues at play. The need of the world to move beyond polluting energy onto more advanced and cleaner sources of power not redistributing wealth to those most likely to squander it.

    Cap and trade really is just a scheme designed to funnel money to the third world. Giving money to tyrannical regimes has never saved anyone or anything. In fact history has proven it has done the opposite including deforestation, more pollution (not less), not to mention evil acts. Transferring wealth to the third world in the name of reducing CO2 will only prop up evil men and undermine our true values. That of a world of liberty and freedom.

    Apple and Nike are companies ran by designers not scientists. When Dow Chemical, Proctor and Gamble, and GE start shutting down their CO2 intensive industries (being they are science managed businesses) I will believe that Climate Change is a proven concrete phenomenon.

    And there a many more REAL arguments where those came from. Todd Wynn should actually stop being such an alarmist hack himself.

  • Andrew

    Okay, your premise is bullshit and your talking points are garbage.

    Exactly what U.S.-based competitors do Nike and Apple have? Every one of their competitors manufactures overseas. Unless you’re counting tiny niche markets those companies have jumped into, like the eco-gear brands of Patagonia and Nau.

    And from a long-term market perspective, environmental regulations mean healthier employees, conditions that prevent mental illness like depression and a variety of other “opportunity benefits” from a healthier environment.

    Sorry, but I put air to breathe and water to drink above a new iPhone. And I won’t have anywhere to take those Nike shoes when all the forests and beaches are gone.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Andrew, but air to breath and water to drink have nothing to do with CO2 emissions and global warming. You’re soaking in too much BS to even contribute to the conversation..

  • Jerry

    I’ll take the iPhone and an SUV every time.

  • v person

    Poor poor “conservatives.” You are destined to watch the world pass you by while you kevetch, deny reality, and offer nothing positive because you view that as compromise. Now you are even losing major corporations, who used to automatically be on your side. Your castle walls are crumbling.

    Meanwhile the rest of the world is moving on and trying to solve big problems rather than live with our heads inserted into dark places.

  • Anonymous

    v/dean who get’s nearly everything wrong,

    One of your worst and most conveluted perspectives is on conservatives.

    There is no denying reality here in the conservative arena.
    That’s just your view from the la la land of progressive.

    With an expected $8 trillion added to our national debt in the next 10 years and a $100 Trillion unfunded liability facing us during this century your mental disorder progressive movement is about to crash and burn.
    Amnesty, Health Care, Global Warming and Terrorism are all putting yoour insanity and dishonesty on full display.

    Now why don’t you do something to help Damascus.

  • Anonymous

    Climate Blamed for Swarming Jellyfish
    https://news.aol.com/article/global-warming-blamed-for-giant/767898

    ????

    What should we make of this?

  • Anonymous

    We should make of it exctly what it is. The same s David Appell attributing Huricanne Katrina to our CO2 emission warming which hasn’t even occured.

    It’s been a widespread fraud as the warmers attribute their every observation, and more, to warming that has yet to occur in amounts needed to cause the vast majority of their silly and dishonest claims.

    Never has there been more fabrications. This tsunami of BS coming from every imaginable left wing cause is historical.

    • Anonymous

      “The waters of the Yellow Sea, meanwhile, have warmed as much as 3 degrees F over the past quarter-century.”

      So this is a lie? Or is it the result of something other than human activity?

      How should the global community respond to natural phenomena such as this?

      Should we err on the side of caution? Or should we just put our heads down and behave as though it were not a concern?

      I am neither a scientist nor a policymaker and do not pretend to have the answers to any of these questions. Nor am I posing them to any of you because I have some political axe to grind. I am genuinely curious to hear what you all think.

  • Anonymous

    The lie would be that science has shown human CO2 emission have warmed the Yellow sea.

    Just as science has not shown Katrin to be caused by same. Or Oregon’r ocean dead zones or polar bear population reductions, etc etc etc

    It’s not erring on the side of caution to react to the perpetrating of fabrication.
    It’s foolishness.

    Understanding the extensive fabrication in the AGW connection arena is key for laypeople intereste in knowing what’s going on.

    Yes, it’s true, your academia/researchers, goverment agencys researchers and elected officials have fabricated much in this hoax.

    From right here in Oregon by OSU researchers, climatologist Phil Mote, Bill Bradbury and Governor Kulongoski to people and entities around the glode.
    Not in “conspiracy” fashion which AGW loyalists then try and obfuscate with.
    But by people and groups with conflicts of interests and ulterior motives seeing advantage to their causes if this movement advances.

    OSU was given $9 million dollars to play around off the coast and study our seasonal ocead dead zones. They could find no link to global warming yet speculated with one of the weakest and most egregious claims that it “could be” global warming winds as the cause.
    So how many careers did this $9 million pad?

    The lead researcher is now the head of NOAA. There to make even more baseless global warming declarations.

    • Anonymous

      Again, I just want to be clear that I have no axe to grind, though I may be considered a victim of propaganda by those that share your point of view.

      “The lie would be that science has shown human CO2 emission have warmed the Yellow sea.”

      My understanding is that CO2 emissions are being considered as a cause, or at the very least as a contributing factor. In other words, it is a hypothesis; nothing more than a provisional theory the function of which is to guide further investigation.

      “It’s not erring on the side of caution to react to the perpetrating of fabrication. It’s foolishness.”

      But, until a better explanation of this empirical phenomena can be given would it not be foolish to presume humans have had no effect on the oceans, atmosphere, climate, etc?

      Frankly, this is not an issue that I have followed at all closely. As such I plead ignorance. That said and with regard to the rest of your comment, I have no doubt there are many out there who seek to exploit and/or capitalize on this and any other global crisis. Humans are not the most virtuous creatures in that respect. That fact though has little bearing, in my opinion, on the reality of climate change.

      So, you’ve denied human activity as a potential cause for this particular phenomenon, what then do you propose is the cause of the warming of the Yellow Sea?

      BTW, I apologize for veering off-topic. I’m aware this has little to do with cap-and-trade.

  • Anonymous

    Look, there is No established link between the Yellow Sea and AGW, period.

    That doesn’t require coming up with an alternative cause.

    It requires the AGW claim to be shown. Not simply stated in a suggestion then treated as if it demands a remedy.

    Thyat’s the whole point here.
    Heck we have left wing loons hiking in the Cascades and claiming they see signs/proof of AGW everywhere.

    • Anonymous

      Here’s the rub, Anonymous, something is causing the Yellow Sea to warm. Something (perhaps many things) is causing a variety of distressing climate changes to occur. I don’t understand your lack of concern (and I am trying)? Are you saying that global warming is essentially a myth? That this is all just the product of the very normal warming and cooling cycles of the Earth? What are you saying other than that there exists a conspiracy of lying imbeciles who would do well to listen to you?

      Who are you? What are your credentials? Why should anyone trust you and not someone else?

      Are these not fair questions? How are you so certain CO2 emissions (and other greenhouse gases) are doing no harm?

      • Anon3x

        apparently you slept through history: *Weather is extremely variable!*

        Did you ever hear of the Egyptian warm period?
        Did you ever hear of the Minoan warm period?
        Did you ever hear of the Roman warm period?
        Did you ever hear of the Dark ages?
        Did you ever hear of the Medieval warm period?
        Did you ever hear of the Little Ice age?

        • Anonymous

          Yes, I did. You are clearly better than me.

  • Anonymous

    No there is not “a variety of distressing climate changes” occuring.

    AndI can tell this is a usual suspect enaged in role playing.

    If you are not then take a strole thorugh the internet.

    http://www.wattsupwiththat.com
    http://www.ice.us
    http://www.climateaudit.org

    And bone up.

    The reasons are many for rejecting the AGW movement.

    It’s easy to grasp the lack of concern. And graps the disgust over the movement misleading people.
    Yes, this is all just the product of the very normal warming and cooling cycles of the Earth?
    The current reported warming is not reliable and has been misrepresented as historical.

    Go look at WUWT and join the open discussion.

    The warmers would have you go to realclimate.org which is possibly the most edited, redacted, censored and manipulated blog on the internet.
    That’s what the AGW team must do to sustain their fraud. They can’t allow open participation.

    Who are you? What are your credentials?
    I’m not asking anyone to “trust me”. Trust real science and not the charaltans perpetrating the AGW fraud.

    Go see how ignorant gore is
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/16/gore-has-no-clue-a-few-million-degrees-here-and-there-and-pretty-soon-were-talking-about-real-temperature/

    And click on the WUWT header for other recent topics

    • Anonymous

      “No there is not “a variety of distressing climate changes” occuring”

      I’m pretty sure the Japanese fishermen from the AP story would disagree.

      “AndI can tell this is a usual suspect enaged in role playing.”

      Relax detective, I’m not the guy you’re looking for.

      “If you are not then take a strole thorugh the internet.”

      http://www.wattsupwiththat.com
      http://www.ice.us
      http://www.climateaudit.org

      “And bone up.”

      Are you kidding me?

      Anthony Watts seems to be a garden variety reactionary, ice.us redirected to a fashion website, and climateaudit.org states explicitly that they make no claims that their work disproves global warming (not to mention that McKitrick is an economist and McIntyre makes his living in the “mineral exploration financing” industry).

      “The reasons are many for rejecting the AGW movement.”

      Okay. The reasons are many for accepting the AGW movement. That about sums that argument up, no?

      “It’s easy to grasp the lack of concern. And graps the disgust over the movement misleading people.
      Yes, this is all just the product of the very normal warming and cooling cycles of the Earth?
      The current reported warming is not reliable and has been misrepresented as historical.”

      As stated above, I can understand your “disgust over the movement misleading people”. I don’t particularly appreciate that sort of thing myself (whether the deception has to do with climate change or anything else).

      “I’m not asking anyone to “trust me”. Trust real science and not the charaltans perpetrating the AGW fraud.”

      One more time: I AM NOT A SCIENTIST and therefore truly have no idea who the “real scientists” are and who the charlatans are.

      “Go see how ignorant gore is
      https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/16/gore-has-no-clue-a-few-million-degrees-here-and-there-and-pretty-soon-were-talking-about-real-temperature/

      You speak as though I give a shit what Al Gore thinks about anything. I watched “An Inconvenient Truth” and was bored.

      What you fail to understand is that you are fighting a losing battle. The sad truth is that perception is often reality, and whether true or not, the perceived need for “green” policy and “green” innovation is going to be what drives the future global economy. But by all means, you and our pals continue to throw your little temper tantrums while the rest of us grown ups laugh and adapt our businesses to the demands of the market. Best of luck.

  • Anonymous

    The truth about realclimate

    https://www.populartechnology.net/2009/07/truth-about-realclimateorg.html

    The truth is that RealClimate.org is an environmentalist shill site directly connected to an eco-activist group, Environmental Media Services and Al Gore but they don’t want you to know that.

  • bonny

    Dear Mr. Vice President,

    I hope you being your work in Portland, OR this week with two important disclosures.

    1.) Share with us, the same disclaimer the British High Court required all U.K. school children to see before watching your film, An Inconvenient Truth.

    https://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2633838.ece

    Al Gore’s award-winning climate change documentary was littered with nine inconvenient untruths, a judge ruled yesterday.

    An Inconvenient Truth won plaudits from the environmental lobby and an Oscar from the film industry but was found wanting when it was scrutinised in the High Court in London.

    Mr Justice Burton identified nine significant errors within the former presidential candidate’s documentary as he assessed whether it should be shown to school children. He agreed that Mr Gore’s film was “broadly accurate” in its presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change but said that some of the claims were wrong and had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”.

    2.) Disclose how global warming now, climate change, has increased your net worth by $98 million dollars and why. And why you think you are still objective about this subject matter?

    https://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=475461
    “Cap-And-Trade: Al Gore’s Cash Cow

    Posted 04/29/2009 06:57 PM ET

    Global Warming: At the cap-and-trade hearings, it was revealed that not everyone will suffer from this growth-killing energy tax. A congresswoman wanted to know why sea levels aren’t rising but Gore’s bank account is.

    When Gore left office in January 2001, he was said to have a net worth in the neighborhood of $2 million. A mere eight years later, estimates are that he is now worth about $100 million. It seems it’s easy being green, at least for some.”

  • Malcolm Grundig

    The single greatest problem before us is global warming.
    It is just so cold out now that I can’t work on it.

  • Anonymous

    18.1 anon

    Your characterization of watts, icecap and climateaudit exposes you for your ignorance and left wing bias.

    Your enamor over the “green”movement further demonstrates your affliction.

    And the trend is not moving towards accepting AGW at all. Quite the contrary and if you actuallydid follow the topic you would see the real trend on full display.

    Instead you’re spreading the deliberate misrepresentation that the skeptics have nothing.

    MCIntire is NOT under the influence of indutry AT ALL. Watts has extraordinary work by many thoroughly and openly discussed on his # 1 sceince blog which now gets over 2 million hits per month.
    Icecap.us stays current with posting all the latest developments occuring all over the planet.

    You are a phony, unethical propogandist.

    You are too sure of your grabage to pretend to be interested in learning. So stop the stupid game.

    • Anonymous

      “Your characterization of watts, icecap and climateaudit exposes you for your ignorance and left wing bias”

      Whatever you say, chief.

      “Your enamor over the “green”movement further demonstrates your affliction.”

      Huh?

      “And the trend is not moving towards accepting AGW at all. Quite the contrary and if you actuallydid follow the topic you would see the real trend on full display.”

      Like I already said pal, I DON’T FOLLOW THE TOPIC.

      “Instead you’re spreading the deliberate misrepresentation that the skeptics have nothing.”

      I’m really not doing that at all.

      “MCIntire is NOT under the influence of indutry AT ALL. Watts has extraordinary work by many thoroughly and openly discussed on his # 1 sceince blog which now gets over 2 million hits per month.
      Icecap.us stays current with posting all the latest developments occuring all over the planet.”

      I never said McIntyre was “under the influence” of any industry. I merely pointed out that neither of the gentlemen who operate climateaudit.org makes their living as a SCIENTIST, and that according to information freely available on their site they make no claims that their work disproves global warming (they are critical of the science that claims to prove global warming). Watts does extraordinary work? Okay. I guess I don’t care. And hey man, you’re the one who wrote ice.us… I checked it out and it re-directed to a fashion site. That’s what happened. Now I’ll go check out icecap.us… whatever.

      “You are a phony, unethical propogandist.”

      HAHAHAAAAAAA!!! Hilarious!!!

      Let me lay it out for you in no uncertain terms. I drive an SUV. I do so without a shred of guilt and have no plans to purchase a Prius. I don’t particularly care if homo sapiens survives in the long run and I’m not the least bit concerned that the Earth will “die” as the result of our burning of fossil fuels etc. In other words, if we cross some unknown threshold of pollution density and the planet’s self-regulatory mechanisms cause our extinction then so be it. My only concerns have to do with my own personal consumption. Would I hate to see the ocean’s food chain collapse because yellowfin tuna have gone extinct for whatever reason? Yeah, probably (though it might be interesting), but what would really suck is that I’d never enjoy sushi again. You see, I like sushi very, very much. Starting to understand where I’m coming from? Basically? This is a resource management problem not a moral imperative.

      And one more thing… my area of expertise is engineering/design. I can tell you with absolute certainty that my industry, broad as it is, is almost wholly focused on the development of “green” technology and/or the implementation of renewable/sustainable strategies. Whether you like it or not and whether it is well-founded or not, that is the way of the future. Get up to speed or fall behind. What you decide to do really makes no difference to me.

      “You are too sure of your grabage to pretend to be interested in learning. So stop the stupid game.”

      I think you need to calm down, re-evaluate the situation, and stop making an ass of yourself.

  • Anonymous

    Yes and the green movement is riding the integrity train right?

    It’s you who needs to get up to speed. You’ve demonstrated your willing participation in the thoroughly dishonest agenda.

    • Anonymous

      You’ve lost your mind dude, and you seem to have trouble reading. I don’t consider this to be a moral imperative of any kind. Nor would attribute the quality of “integrity” to any group of human beings (I’m a misanthropist at heart). But if you want to accuse Al Gore, members of the scientific community who believe other than you, and the cap-and-trade folks of being dishonest, immoral, opportunistic profiteers then be my guest. Maybe they are? As for my part, are you seriously trying to tell me that developing green technologies and materials constitutes a “willing participation in the thoroughly dishonest agenda”? If so then you are what we call in the business a “douche bag”.

  • Anonymous

    Look bozo, manage this.
    The AGW movement is a fraud and your little dance here trying to posture above it is lame.

    The green movement is ripe with misappropriatioin of tax dollars, scandal and masive failure of public investment. In Oregon.
    Developing new technologies is a must and legitimate. The green movement is not.,

  • Anonymous

    “Look bozo, manage this.”

    Geez, you sure are an angry little guy.

    “The AGW movement is a fraud…”

    There sure seems to be a lot of folks out there (myself included) that seem to think environmental awareness and responsibility, whether well-founded in science or not, is probably for the best. Even a dog has enough sense not to piss in his own bowl. That’s a little bit of folksy wisdom for you. You’re welcome.

    “…and your little dance here trying to posture above it is lame.”

    Nuh-uh.

    “The green movement is ripe with misappropriatioin of tax dollars, scandal and masive failure of public investment. In Oregon.”

    Well, maybe you should start ranting like a nutcase on your local libertarian blog? That ought to fix the problem, yeah?

    “Developing new technologies is a must and legitimate. The green movement is not.,”

    Hate it to break it to you, pal, but they kind of go hand in hand these days.

  • forex robot

    Great post this will really help me.

  • Pingback: isabel marant etoile sneakers()

  • Pingback: réplique rolex occasion belgique()

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)